Halton Hills mayor assures artifacts will be preserved as region plans to shutter its heritage services
The mayor of Halton Hills is assuring residents that items of historical significance will be preserved as the region moves forward with a plan to shutter its heritage services.
Mayor Ann Lawlor, who represents the urban centres of Georgetown and Acton along with several smaller communities, noted that there has been 'concern that artifacts reflective of our community's history may be lost.'
'I want residents to know that the deaccessioning process will ensure that items of significance to Halton Hills and Esquesing Township will be preserved,' she said in a written statement.
Lawlor went on to say that she's spoken with Chair Gary Carr and regional staff about these concerns and anticipates that a meeting will be held early this fall to discuss the next steps for Halton's historical collection.
'I am committed to keeping the community updated on this issue and I look forward to participating with our local heritage organizations in the Region-led process,' she said, adding that the region's decision 'creates an opportunity for the artifacts to be maintained in a manner more accessible to residents.'
Regional Council voted in July to 'cease delivering heritage services'
Halton Regional Council voted on July 9 to 'cease delivering heritage services' by the end of this year and disperse upwards of 35,000 valuable artifacts, including photos, archival materials, natural and Indigenous artifacts, farming equipment, artwork, and furniture and clothing.
This marks a departure from Halton Region's five-year operational plan, which regional council endorsed in 2021 and included the construction of a new $8 million museum. That facility, however, was never built.
Halton Region spokesperson Isabel Contin recently told The Canadian Press that its heritage service is shuttering as Bill 23 - the 2022 law passed by the Ontario government as part of its goal to build 1.5 million new homes by 2031 - has led to 'shifting land-use planning responsibilities from the Region to the local municipalities.'
'This includes heritage, but also economic development, agriculture, and forestry,' she said.
Halton Hills resident launched peition opposing region's decision
Kevin Reid-Morris, of Halton Hills, says he's 'deeply disturbed by both the process and outcome of this decision' and has created a petition, which so far has more than 1,300 signatories, calling for a reversal of the region's decision to shutter its heritage services.
'As I shared my shock with others, it became clear that Council had not taken into account what residents and community members want. We want a Halton Heritage Services that supports, boosts, and values history and its massively positive impacts to culture, quality of life, and economic development for residents,' he wrote in a statement provided to CP24.
'The passion, anger, and hurt this has struck in the hearts of our community is significant.'
Petition opposing closure of Halton Region Heritage Services
A petition opposing Halton Region's decision to shutter its heritage services has more than 1,300 signiatories.
Among other things, Reid-Morris said he's concerned about the lack of community consultation in regards to this decision, which says was made by a 'small group of councillors' following a 'review of a confidential document not available to the public.'
And while, opponents appreciate Lawlor for making a public statement on the matter, which he said to his knowledge is the only councillor or leadership figure to do so despite the outcry, her response is 'completely inadequate and wrong.'
Reid-Morris said questions about why heritage services is closing are not being answered.
He also indicated that local organizations are not properly prepared to accept the artifacts that will be dispersed as many of these groups have signed the petition.
Kevin Reid-Morris
Halton Hills resident Kevin Reid-Morris is 'deeply disturbed by both the process and outcome of this decision' and has created a petition, which so far has more than 1,300 signatories, calling for a reversal of the region's decision to shutter its heritage services.
Further, Reid-Morris is questioning the sudden about-face from the region when it comes to the previous strategic plan for Heritage Services and where the $8M that was approved for building a new museum went.
'Public statements from the Regional Chair and Council communicated nothing but enthusiasm and support for Heritage Services at the time, just a few years ago,' he said.
Reid-Morris said Halton Region should be striving to do better when it comes to its heritage services and artifacts, not 'less bad,' and think about the future.
'The community wants 'more good' when it comes to Heritage Services. We should be doubling down on our investments in heritage—like what was agreed and committed to in the strategic plan, if not more—and acknowledging the value it offers the region's residents, visitors, businesses, society and the economy,' he wrote.
'And where the Region really misses the point on all this is that it is not just about what happens to the artifacts in the collection today but about the travesty of not continuing to foster and develop heritage capabilities, assets, and services into the future.'
Region says it's committed to preserving shared history, ensuring artifacts stay accessible
The chair of Halton Regional Council, meanwhile, assured that they're committed to 'preserving our shared history and ensuring that artifacts of local significance remain accessible.'
'We look forward to working with Halton Hills, Esquesing Township, and local heritage partners to keep these connections to our past alive for future generations,' Carr said in a release.
The artifacts in question have been kept in safe storage at the site of the former Halton Region Museum in Milton, which closed in 2016.
Until Jan. 1, that building at 5181 Kelso Rd. will serve as the Halton Region Heritage Services archive. After that, the artifacts will be gradually rehomed, the region said. The goal is to transfer them to a local institution in another municipality or region, a spokesperson told The Canadian Press.
Lawlor noted that the regional council's decision will not result in any change to local heritage building designations or the Town's cultural heritage efforts, adding that Halton Hills' 'long-standing' program of designating heritage buildings would continue 'with vigour.'
Several more heritage building designations are planned for this fall, she said.
With files from The Canadian Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
28 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Toddlers among Canadians detained by ICE
A Globe and Mail investigation has revealed the extent to which Canadians have been caught up in U.S. President Trump's immigration crackdown. Analysis of data, obtained through a federal lawsuit, shows nearly 150 Canadians have been detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) since the beginning of this year. These Canadians range from two years old to 77 years old. Kathryn Blaze Baum, an investigative reporter for The Globe, joins The Decibel to break down the exclusive reporting, explains what the Canadian government says it's willing to do and whether advocates think that's enough. Questions? Comments? Ideas? Email us at thedecibel@
Globe and Mail
28 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Lester Pearson, his Buick and the pact that changed the Canadian auto sector
Dumaresq de Pencier is the exhibit and project coordinator for the Canadian Automotive Museum in Oshawa, Ont. Late Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson's 1963 Buick isn't quite the vehicle you'd expect to be used by a former head of state: It's about the size of an upper-end sedan for its time – with a bit of extra chrome here and there – but no bells and whistles such as bulletproof glass or an intercom. It's only when you see the little Canadian coat of arms emblazoned on the inside doors that you realize the Oshawa-made, custom limousine formerly owned by Canada's 14th Prime Minister might be anything beyond a run-of-the-mill model for its day. It's surprisingly understated when you consider Pearson's legacy, including a Nobel Prize for peacekeeping, the iconic Maple Leaf flag, encouraging official bilingualism, improving women's rights, universal health care and the 1965 Auto Pact that shaped the North American auto sector (now under threat by U.S.-driven tariffs). Yet, Pearson was a famously modest person, a diplomat uncomfortable with the public spotlight, which his vehicle – recently restored and now on display at the Canadian Automotive Museum in Oshawa – reflects. Pearson's stamp on the auto industry Pearson was by no means a car buff but, by being born in 1897, he was the first Canadian prime minister to have grown up in and around the creation of the automobile. When he came to office in the mid-1960s, Canada was in the midst of an industrial crisis. Canada's auto industry had long been protected by import tariffs on American industrial goods instituted in the late 19th century. The local market was a walled garden, producing a small range of locally sold vehicles. Canada-only vehicle marques such as Ford's maple-spangled Frontenac, General Motors's successful Acadian and Chrysler's Windsor (which remained in Canadian production for six years after its American counterpart), were usually low to mid-range cars fitted with high-end trim, perfect for Canadian buyers who wanted a fancy-looking car at an affordable price. Pearson's limousine is a classic example of Canadian car-building of the time: It combines the roomy chassis of a Buick LeSabre, the engine of a Wildcat, the trim of a high-end Electra and internal components from that year's Cadillacs to create a luxurious-looking limousine on a not-so-luxurious platform. But as the American car industry grew throughout the 1960s, the quaint local manufacturing style on this side of the border began to fall by the wayside. As prices dropped, more American cars were being imported to Canada as tariffs didn't have much financial impact. With fewer cars being shipped from Canada to Europe, owing to the growth of companies such as Volkswagen, Canada's trade deficit skyrocketed. Canadian governments under Prime Minister John Diefenbaker and then Pearson tried – and failed – to boost industry growth with protective tariffs, triggering genuine fears of a trade war that the U.S. auto manufacturing juggernaut would likely win. In 1964, 90 per cent of the Canadian auto industry was American-owned. Its hundreds of thousands of employees were represented by the United Auto Workers, headquartered in the U.S. Any fixing of the Canadian auto industry would have to be an international collaboration. Pearson's administration eventually came up with the Auto Pact, officially known as the Automotive Products Trade Agreement, signed by Pearson and President Lyndon Johnson in Texas in January, 1965. After a year of wrangling with the Big Three auto manufacturers (Ford, GM and Chrysler) and the unions, the two administrations produced something that was almost, but not quite, free trade. The Pact introduced a system wherein American-designed cars had to include Canadian-made parts and a ratio whereby every American car sold in Canada was matched by a car built here. Canada's market was no longer threatened by the American one – it was part of it – with cars and car parts traded tariff-free. Existing manufacturers had to expand their Canadian branches or risk losing the benefits of the Pact, with a 'buy-in' investment of $260-million (more than $2.5-billion in today's dollars). The Pact was deeply controversial among the American public, but auto builders weren't complaining. The Big Three could dramatically simplify their production, making an interchangeable range of vehicles on either side of the border. The Auto Pact's success and unpopularity The effects were dramatic and rapid. New factories sprouted across southern Ontario and Quebec. Existing plants were vastly expanded. Before the Pact, American-owned plants in Canada were building around 650,000 cars and exporting less than 1,000 of them to the U.S. Ten years later, Canadian plants built 1.5 million cars, exporting one million of them. By the 1970s, about 10 per cent of all cars sold in America were Canadian-made and many more included Canadian parts. On the American side, exports to Canada jumped dramatically as production grew. The Pact remained unpopular yet successful throughout the 1970s and 80s, despite U.S. President Richard Nixon's administration threatening to cancel it on several occasions. In 1986, it became part of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, which kept most of its provisions in force while simultaneously rendering them obsolete. Its effect continued. By 1999, Canadian car production peaked at a whopping three million vehicles. Canada's auto sector has faced challenges and turbulent times since: Recessions, bailouts, downsizing and outsourcing have led to an industry that is somewhat leaner and shabbier than the monolith it once was. Still, it has remained an essential part of the Canadian economy, thanks in large part to a modest man in a modest limousine.
Globe and Mail
28 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Canada's trade strategy suffers from delusions of friendship
John Turley-Ewart is a contributing columnist for The Globe and Mail, a regulatory compliance consultant and a Canadian banking historian. Ontario Premier Doug Ford recently declared on CNN that in Canada, U.S. President Donald Trump is the 'most disliked politician in the world . . . because he has attacked his closest family member.' In January, just before Mark Carney announced his leadership bid for the Liberal Party, he appeared on The Daily Show and told Americans that Canada and the United States could be 'friends with benefits.' Are prominent U.S. leaders making time for media appearances to defend Canada as their 'closest family member'? Believing that trading partners are family, or friends even, betrays our leaders' wide-eyed view of the world that not even historical precedent appears able to shake. It has invited complacency and deepens the damaging economic consequences when trade relationships evolve or break apart. If there is one long-term takeaway for Canadian leaders from Mr. Trump's assault on Canada's access to U.S. markets, it's realizing that countries we trade with are neither family nor friends, but jurisdictions that do business with us – business that is transactional, situational and evolving. We have had Donald Trump-like figures before who upended our economy and who we should have already learned this lesson from. One of the first was Robert Peel, who was the British prime minister between 1841 and 1846. Unlike Mr. Trump, he was a protectionist-turned-free-trader. In 1842, he cut tariffs on British timber imports that gave Canadian timber preferential access to British markets. Consequently, our timber exports fell. In 1846, Mr. Peel dropped Britain's protectionist tariffs on grain, ending Canada's preferential grain market access that had been in place since 1815. Lumber producers praise federal plan to diversify markets amid trade war with U.S. Three years later, Canada's then Governor-General, Lord Elgin, reported that property in Montreal and 'in most of the Canadian towns . . . had fallen by 50 per cent in value' and that 'three-fourths of the commercial men are bankrupt.' By 1854, the search for a market to replace lost share in Britain was secured through a reciprocity deal with the U.S. that removed duties on fish, timber, coal and grain just as railways began to boom in Canada, opening more efficient transportation routes to move Canadian goods south. The good times lasted 12 years. U.S. President Andrew Johnson cancelled the trade deal in 1866, given growing protectionist sentiment in the U.S. and popular belief that the deal was benefitting Canadians more than Americans. The abrogation of the 1854 trade agreement helped cement efforts to create what we now know as Canada through Confederation in 1867, a project that was expected to create one national economy to help compensate for lost trade with the U.S. Today's interprovincial trade barriers measure the success of that intention. There are plenty of other past examples. The U.S. Fordney-McCumber Act in 1922 slapped an average 40-per-cent tariff on imports. This was followed by the American Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in 1930, and in 1971, President Richard Nixon's administration imposed a 10-per-cent tariff on many Canadian goods crossing the border. Opinion: Ottawa can't let our canola industry – a true Canadian success story – fade away The present isn't any friendlier than the past. Last week, China took hostage Canada's multibillion-dollar canola export trade, imposing 75.8-per-cent duties on Canadian canola seed. This is a transparent attempt to force the federal government to backtrack on Ottawa's 100-per-cent tariff on Chinese-made electric vehicles. Equally transparent is China's goal of crushing our EV sector through the sale of cheap EVs produced using low-wage work, heavily subsidized, stolen or misappropriated IP, and as Human Rights Watch has documented, forced labour. Canada has negotiated many trade agreements with other countries, yet, those deals are often more sizzle than steak. As trade experts noted earlier this year in Policy Magazine, 'Today, Canada has more comprehensive trade agreements than any other G7 country. But having a trade agreement is one thing; leveraging it is another. Utilization rates of these agreements have remained low. . .' The 2017 Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement is an example. It has yet to win full ratification by all EU member states. The obstacles are material. Differing approaches to environmental, agricultural and digital regulations and standards are persistent barriers. The Europeans seem not to care, given all the Canadian interprovincial trade barriers that also complicate EU trade with Canada. In Britain, objections to Canada's dairy and supply management systems as well as rules of origin closed the doors on free trade. Trade negotiations with Britain collapsed in 2024. The world isn't made up of countries that want to trade with Canada because they are our family or friends. It's comprised of countries who only value how Canada can serve their economic needs and political agendas. It's time we admitted to that reality. Doing so will at the very least reduce the shock when trade deals go sideways.
